Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
haines8
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 3:21 am

Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby haines8 » Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:39 pm

I am using one rule but getting the rules from two sections that are not next to each other. How would I cite it? For example, rule 11 sections (a) and (c). Would I just write Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 (a), (c).

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:42 pm

Bluebook. It's in there. It has an index for a reason.

nucky thompson
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:32 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby nucky thompson » Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:52 pm

kalvano wrote:Bluebook. It's in there. It has an index for a reason.


Kalvano, one day you will look back and think - am I lonely and unhappy because I am bitter, or am I bitter because I am lonely and unhappy --- and the answer will be a resounding YES! and then you will wish you could have done things differently... well - do things differently. from now on, if you dont want to answer a fucking question, just do not answer it. for now on instead of responding to questions like a fucking dickhead just to feel good about yourself, how about just NOT RESPONDING

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:57 pm

nucky thompson wrote:
kalvano wrote:Bluebook. It's in there. It has an index for a reason.


Kalvano, one day you will look back and think - am I lonely and unhappy because I am bitter, or am I bitter because I am lonely and unhappy --- and the answer will be a resounding YES! and then you will wish you could have done things differently... well - do things differently. from now on, if you dont want to answer a fucking question, just do not answer it. for now on instead of responding to questions like a fucking dickhead just to feel good about yourself, how about just NOT RESPONDING


Ask a stupid question, get a clear and succinct answer that explains where to find the information you seek. Yeah, real dick move, way more assholish than launching a tirade against a total stranger. And not answering the question at all. You fucking halfwit.
Last edited by kalvano on Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AVBucks4239
Posts: 870
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby AVBucks4239 » Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:43 pm

nucky thompson wrote:
kalvano wrote:Bluebook. It's in there. It has an index for a reason.


Kalvano, one day you will look back and think - am I lonely and unhappy because I am bitter, or am I bitter because I am lonely and unhappy --- and the answer will be a resounding YES! and then you will wish you could have done things differently... well - do things differently. from now on, if you dont want to answer a fucking question, just do not answer it. for now on instead of responding to questions like a fucking dickhead just to feel good about yourself, how about just NOT RESPONDING

Get the fuck out of here.

Kalvano is right. OP needs to learn how to Bluebook and the easiest way is to just figure it out yourself. It's not hard. Use the fucking index.

nucky thompson
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:32 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby nucky thompson » Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:32 pm

AVBucks4239 wrote:
nucky thompson wrote:
kalvano wrote:Bluebook. It's in there. It has an index for a reason.


Kalvano, one day you will look back and think - am I lonely and unhappy because I am bitter, or am I bitter because I am lonely and unhappy --- and the answer will be a resounding YES! and then you will wish you could have done things differently... well - do things differently. from now on, if you dont want to answer a fucking question, just do not answer it. for now on instead of responding to questions like a fucking dickhead just to feel good about yourself, how about just NOT RESPONDING

Get the fuck out of here.

Kalvano is right. OP needs to learn how to Bluebook and the easiest way is to just figure it out yourself. It's not hard. Use the fucking index.


Hey - white knight . . .

Kalvano may be right - you may be right - but OP did not get on TLS for an answer his legal writing prof would have given. By your logic many questions on TLS should go unanswered - law student need to learn legal doctrine and the "easiest" way is to just figure it out for themselves - its not hard, just use the fucking case opinions right??? (bluebook index is just about as easy to understand as case opinions)

Marlins
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:21 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby Marlins » Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:11 pm

haines8 wrote:I am using one rule but getting the rules from two sections that are not next to each other. How would I cite it? For example, rule 11 sections (a) and (c). Would I just write Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 (a), (c).


Hey, sorry everyone on here acts like a douchebag. I'll try to answer your question.

I'm not a BB pro, so I can't guarantee you this is the right answer, but I think the correct citation format would be like this:

Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a), (c). (basically the same as you wrote, just put the "(a)" directly after the 11).

I think the reason why you asked the question is because the BB in both sections B5.1.3 and R12.9.3 only gives examples of how to cite to one particular rule in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and it seems to give no guidance on how to cite multiple rules at the same time--which is why I'm not 100% sure about my answer. I just searched for briefs that have made the same citation and that's what I found--so I think it should be right.

Anyway, hope that helps!

Take care.

User avatar
patrickd139
Posts: 2883
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:53 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby patrickd139 » Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:31 pm

nucky thompson wrote:
AVBucks4239 wrote:
nucky thompson wrote:
kalvano wrote:Bluebook. It's in there. It has an index for a reason.


Kalvano, one day you will look back and think - am I lonely and unhappy because I am bitter, or am I bitter because I am lonely and unhappy --- and the answer will be a resounding YES! and then you will wish you could have done things differently... well - do things differently. from now on, if you dont want to answer a fucking question, just do not answer it. for now on instead of responding to questions like a fucking dickhead just to feel good about yourself, how about just NOT RESPONDING

Get the fuck out of here.

Kalvano is right. OP needs to learn how to Bluebook and the easiest way is to just figure it out yourself. It's not hard. Use the fucking index.


Hey - white knight . . .

Kalvano may be right - you may be right - but OP did not get on TLS for an answer his legal writing prof would have given. By your logic many questions on TLS should go unanswered - law student need to learn legal doctrine and the "easiest" way is to just figure it out for themselves - its not hard, just use the fucking case opinions right??? (bluebook index is just about as easy to understand as case opinions)

Give a man a fish...Teach a man to fish...

Also, I'm with AVBucks: GTFO with this white-knight shit.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby vanwinkle » Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:39 am

nucky thompson wrote:Kalvano, one day you will look back and think - am I lonely and unhappy because I am bitter, or am I bitter because I am lonely and unhappy --- and the answer will be a resounding YES! and then you will wish you could have done things differently... well - do things differently. from now on, if you dont want to answer a fucking question, just do not answer it. for now on instead of responding to questions like a fucking dickhead just to feel good about yourself, how about just NOT RESPONDING

Nucky, you sound pretty bitter. Lots of unnecessary ad-homs. Why don't you take some quiet time to think about that.

Image

attorneytpc
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2015 4:48 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby attorneytpc » Sun Nov 22, 2015 4:53 pm

This whole string was hilarious. You are all lawyers by now and probably fighting about fighting in court. I've been practicing for 10 years and I happened upon this string searching for an answer to the original question...usually google is a lot faster than message boards or bluebook and just as accurate. But I'm sure someone will ad hom attack me as lazy and a shitty lawyer.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby kalvano » Mon Nov 23, 2015 12:54 am

attorneytpc wrote:You are all lawyers by now and probably fighting about fighting in court.


I never go to court and haven't cited anything since law school. But if I had to, I could still figure out how to because the Bluebook still has an index and I learned how to use it.

User avatar
Companion Cube
Posts: 810
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:21 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby Companion Cube » Mon Nov 23, 2015 11:48 am

kalvano wrote:
attorneytpc wrote:You are all lawyers by now and probably fighting about fighting in court.


I never go to court and haven't cited anything since law school. But if I had to, I could still figure out how to because the Bluebook still has an index and I learned how to use it.


Image

sparty99
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:41 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby sparty99 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:20 pm

I'm trying to find out the answer to this as well. Do you just Fed.R.Civ.P. 25 or Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a)(1)?

NotMyRealName09
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:50 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby NotMyRealName09 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 10:37 pm

Kids don't realize the bluebook is to train them to understand statutory schemes.

Finding dat cross reference is what you'll need to do to answer a client's question on some obscure statutory questions.

NotMyRealName09
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:50 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby NotMyRealName09 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 10:42 pm

sparty99 wrote:I'm trying to find out the answer to this as well. Do you just Fed.R.Civ.P. 25 or Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a)(1)?


Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a).

Spaces between.

BottomOfTotem
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 10:05 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby BottomOfTotem » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:38 pm

Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.

User avatar
Minnietron
Posts: 593
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 12:28 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby Minnietron » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:23 am

BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.

Are you trying to teach us about cognitive dissonance or irony? :lol:

User avatar
ArtistOfManliness
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:56 pm

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby ArtistOfManliness » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:29 am

Too lazy to read the thread, but if you have a BBing question, PM me and i'll tell you the answer.

BottomOfTotem
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 10:05 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby BottomOfTotem » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:58 am

Minnietron wrote:
BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.

Are you trying to teach us about cognitive dissonance or irony? :lol:


Ha nicely done. I was wondering if someone would divert on that point. But unfortunately your analysis is incorrect. An answer in the negative is still an answer.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby kalvano » Thu Oct 20, 2016 8:11 am

BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.


It wasn't a backhanded response, it was pretty straightforward. It's one thing to have a question about some obscure point of law that you don't quite get, and quite another to have a question about how to do something with a reference manual and guide that literally has a built-in "how to use this book" guide printed on it.

User avatar
Minnietron
Posts: 593
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 12:28 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby Minnietron » Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:01 am

BottomOfTotem wrote:
Minnietron wrote:
BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.

Are you trying to teach us about cognitive dissonance or irony? :lol:


Ha nicely done. I was wondering if someone would divert on that point. But unfortunately your analysis is incorrect. An answer in the negative is still an answer.

If you want to get pedantic, the language "simply answer the question" also disqualifies your post pursuant your posting rules. :D

BottomOfTotem
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 10:05 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby BottomOfTotem » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:42 pm

Minnietron wrote:
BottomOfTotem wrote:
Minnietron wrote:
BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.

Are you trying to teach us about cognitive dissonance or irony? :lol:


Ha nicely done. I was wondering if someone would divert on that point. But unfortunately your analysis is incorrect. An answer in the negative is still an answer.

If you want to get pedantic, the language "simply answer the question" also disqualifies your post pursuant your posting rules. :D


Ha fair enough point. I don't necessarily agree, but I see some truth to your response.

BottomOfTotem
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 10:05 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby BottomOfTotem » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:51 pm

kalvano wrote:
BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.


It wasn't a backhanded response, it was pretty straightforward. It's one thing to have a question about some obscure point of law that you don't quite get, and quite another to have a question about how to do something with a reference manual and guide that literally has a built-in "how to use this book" guide printed on it.


I disagree.

When someone asks you a question, and instead of providing an exact answer, you provide a resource that you find useful - that is not direct. If you answered the question plainly (i.e. it is done like this: Rule 34...), that'd be direct.

Also, not only is indirectness a synonym for backhandedness, you responded to a post seeking help with an inference that the person was inept. Acting as though you care, and that you want to help, while calling the person inept, is another example of a backhanded response.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby kalvano » Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:39 pm

BottomOfTotem wrote:
kalvano wrote:
BottomOfTotem wrote:Nucky is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over. Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.


It wasn't a backhanded response, it was pretty straightforward. It's one thing to have a question about some obscure point of law that you don't quite get, and quite another to have a question about how to do something with a reference manual and guide that literally has a built-in "how to use this book" guide printed on it.


I disagree.

When someone asks you a question, and instead of providing an exact answer, you provide a resource that you find useful - that is not direct. If you answered the question plainly (i.e. it is done like this: Rule 34...), that'd be direct.

Also, not only is indirectness a synonym for backhandedness, you responded to a post seeking help with an inference that the person was inept. Acting as though you care, and that you want to help, while calling the person inept, is another example of a backhanded response.


I'm sorry you made incorrect inferences. I thought I was pretty clear that I thought he was inept and still do.

User avatar
Minnietron
Posts: 593
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 12:28 am

Re: Citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Postby Minnietron » Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:41 pm

BottomOfTotem wrote: is right, there is absolutely no need to be a douche. OP is confused, probably isn't understanding the material (which is normal), and looked to his cohort for help. Then Kalvalo gives him some back handed response, which he somehow believes is defined by the word succinct, and when somebody calls him out, more people jump in to back the rudeness. THIS IS NOT THE WAY ADULTS BEHAVE.

I get it, chat rooms make people behave in a strange manner. But like Nucky said, if you can't just simply answer the question, don't say anything.

And please keep the, "that is how you teach" crap to yourselves. As a parent of two, it is a shitty way to do it, and is growing evermore out of favor with academics who research teaching methods. In other words, you're wrong.

Tirade over.
Sorry OP, I can't help you with the citation. It looks like it was answered though.

So the bolded is "simply answer[ing] the question"? If so, I would not want to read your memos or briefs!




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: LawHammer, stig2014 and 5 guests